Michael Maybrick aka Stephen Adams

Michael Maybrick stated in several interviews to certain newspapers that he and Florence Maybrick were the best of friends and got along very well. Well, to be truthful, they were actually bitter enemies, as evidenced by this article:

A WELL-KNOWN SONG.
A Strange Coincidence.

A curious fact (says an exchange) has just come under notice in connection with that well known and oft-sung song "The Holy City." It appears that the famous Mrs. Maybrick, who was recently released, after serving fifteen years' imprisonment on a charge of husband-murder, was the first person who ever sang the song. The song was the work of the younger brother of the man Mrs. Maybrick was convicted of poisoning, his nom de plume being "Stephen Adams." He was her most relentless enemy, and was mainly instrumental in securing her conviction. Mrs. Maybrick was a good musician, had a great liking for music, an excellent voice, and a love of conviviality. Her husband owned a fine yacht, feature of which was a music saloon. Michael Maybrick, who had just leaped into fame as the composer of "Nancy Lee," was present at one of these musical evenings while the yacht was anchored in the Mersey. He produced from his pocket a manuscript song, which he said he had written that afternoon while dreaming the time away in his cabin and listening to the splash of the waters. He had caught the inspiration of Weatherley's words, but the voice part only had been jotted down. The accompaniment had still to be filled in. Sitting at the piano, he vamped an introduction and asked his sister-in-law, Mrs. Florence Maybrick, to sing "The Holy City" from the voice part. She was an excellent reader, and readily did this, he filling in an extemporised accompaniment. Thus it was her voice which for the first time stirred the air with strains destined to become as well known as Sullivan's "Lost Chord" or Faure's "The Palms."

Source: The Wairarapa Daily Times, Tuesday December 20, 1904, Page 7

The following article caught my eye and caused immediate laughter, due to a name included therein, which I recognized, that of one Sir Charles Russell - the same defence attorney who defended the Parnellites during the Parnell Commission Inquiry. Absolutely hilarious!

FAMOUS MURDER TRIAL RECALLED.
MRS. MAYBRICK'S SON DEAD.

THE BOY'S PART IN THE DRAMA.

MAYBRICK. - On April 10, at Rossland, B.C., James Chandler Maybrick, only son of the late James Maybrick, of Liverpool, aged twenty-nine.

The above obituary notice appeared in the "Times" in April. James Chandler Maybrick was eight years old when his mother, Mrs. Florence Maybrick, was sentenced to death on August 7, 1889, for poisoning her husband, James Maybrick, a Liverpool cotton merchant. The death sentence was commuted to penal servitude for life, and after spending fourteen years in prison, Mrs. Maybrick was released from Aylesbury Convict Prison in February, 1904. She went to the United States to live with her mother, Baroness de Roques. After the arrest of Mrs. Maybrick the two children, James Chandler Maybrick, who was called "Bobo," and Gladys, aged three, were taken to be cared for by the father's relatives.
The names of the two children were mentioned during one of the most dramatic phases of the trial. It was in connection with the discovery of the famous letter written by Mrs. Maybrick to Mr. Brierley, in which she said -

"Since my return I have been nursing M day and night - he is sick unto death. The doctors held a consultation yesterday, and now all depends upon how long his strength will hold out. Both my brothers-in-law are here, and we are terribly anxious. I cannot answer your letter fully today, my darling, but relieve your mind of all fear of discovery now or for the future."

This letter Mrs. Maybrick gave to the nurse, Alice Yapp, to post. The nurse said at the trial that she handed the letter to the child (James) to put into the box, but he dropped it into the mud. As to why she opened the letter was the subject of searching cross-examination by Sir Charles Russell (laughter, my emphasis only.) She said she went into the post office to ask for a clean envelope to readdress it, and she opened it as she was going into the post office. On opening the letter and seeing the contents, she gave it to Mr. Michael Maybrick. For the defence, Sir Charles Russell (loud laughter) contended that Alice Yapp invented the story of the letter being dropped into the mud as an excuse for opening her mistress's letter.
Mrs. Maybrick always protested her innocence, and probably public opinion was never more divided on the question of a prisoner's guilt. Mr. Alexander MacDougal, barrister, was strongly convinced of Mrs. Maybrick's innocence, and in 1891 he dedicated his able treatise, "The Maybrick Case," to the two children: -

"James Chandler Maybrick, aged 8 years, and Gladys Evelyn Maybrick, aged four years...With the sincere hope that it will enable them to feel during their lives that the word "mother" is not a "sound unfit to be heard or uttered" by them, and that when they are old enough to understand this record of facts and circumstances, connected with the charge put upon and the trial of Florence Elizabeth Maybrick, aged 27, her children may have throughout their lives the comfort of feeling that their mother was not proved to be guilty of the murder of their father, James Maybrick."

Source: The Auckland Star, Saturday June 3, 1911, Page 17

I thought I would just highlight some of the more interesting compositions from the likes of composer Michael Maybrick aka "Stephen Adams."

FORTUNES IN SONGS.

The recent death of "Stephen Adams," in private life Mr. Michael Maybrick, composer of such world-famous ballad songs as "A Warrior Bold," "Nancy Lee," "The Midshipmite," "The Star of Bethlehem," "The Holy City," "They All Love Jack," and "Thora," reminds one that, unlike many other composers of popular songs, who have usually sold their compositions outright instead of on the royalty basis, he must have made a good sum from his music.
It is true that he sold "A Warrior Bold" for five shillings, a song that produced royalties for its lucky purchaser that ran into four figures, and he also offered "Nancy Lee" to a publisher for twenty guineas. This, however, was refused, but after hearing "Stephen Adams" sing it at St. James's Hall the publisher offered 100 guineas. This time the composer refused, and the song, which the publisher might have had for 21 pounds, ultimately cost him several thousands in royalties.

A 40,000 Pound Song.

Out of the profits of his ballads, Mr. Maybrick was able to found a Ballad Singing prize at the Royal Academy of Music, but it is doubtful if he received as much for any of his songs as the 40,000 pounds which the universally popular "Queen of My Heart" earned for its composer. Sir Arthur Sullivan drew 10,000 pounds in royalties from the "The Lost Chord," while "In Old Madrid," rewarded composer and publisher to the tune of 15,000 pounds. "My Pretty Jane," is said to have yielded a revenue of 2,000 pounds a line, and even after many years of popularity some old favorite songs are worth a substantial sum, for not long ago the copyright of "For All Eternity" was sold for 2,240 pounds.
Mr. Maybrick's five-shilling deal in connection with "A Warrior Bold" and his difficulty in the first place of selling "Nancy Lee" have many parallels. "For All Eternity" was refused by several publishers before a well-known firm agreed to undertake to publish it, while all that the composer of "Listen to the Mocking Bird," by which the publishers are said to have realised 600,000 pounds, received for the song was 7 pounds.

£. s. d. of Music-Hall Songs.

"Alice, Where Art Thou?" was offered to several publishers for a £5 note, and declined with thanks, while "Kathleen Mavourneen" was actually parted with for this absurd sum. Who can estimate the golden harvest that has been reaped from these two songs, which won wide popularity and undying fame? And the same might be said of Balfe's exquisite "Come Into the Garden, Maud," sold by the composer for £100, and of "Cheer, Boys, Cheer," sold by Henry Russell for £3.
A good music-hall song is a mine of wealth nowadays. "Her Golden Hair Was Hanging Down Her Back" earned £20,000 for the composer and publisher, whilst "Hush! Hush! the Bogey Man," was almost as successful. Mr. Bennett Scott wrote "By the Side of the Zuyder Zee" in half an hour, and sold all his rights for £1,000, while "The Man Who Broke the Bank at Monte Carlo" and "The Rowdy-Dowdy Boys" swept like a tornado over the whole world, and earned many thousand of pounds in royalties.

Source: The Rodney and Otamatea Times, Wednesday March 18, 1914, Page 7

HUMAN RIDDLES THAT HAVE VEXED THE WORLD.
Mystery of the Maybrick Poison Case.

By VINCENT TOWNE.
All Rights Reserved.

ARSENIC-EATER.
HUSBAND'S SECRET.

WAS WIFE INNOCENT?

"One man's poison is another man's meat. There is a so-called poison which is meat and liquor to me whenever I feel weak and depressed. I don't tell everybody and wouldn't tell you, only you mentioned arsenic. It is arsenic."
Had this confession of an arsenic-eater been related at the proper time, fate might have dealt differently with an American woman who was the chief actor in one of the most perplexing mysteries of modern times.
Mary Elizabeth Chandler was the daughter of a prosperous banker of Mobile, Ala. Her father died when she was a year old, and after her mother's marriage to the Baron von Roques she divided her time between Europe and America.
At the age of 18, when a wholesome, vivacious girl, fond of outdoor sports, she married James Maybrick, of Liverpool, near which city the couple made their home. During the second year of their marriage a son was born to them and, years later, a daughter.

Much Older Than Wife.

Maybrick was 27 years the senior of his wife. For eight years their married life was happy and contented. Then, of a sudden, they quarrelled, Maybrick losing his temper so far as to blacken his wife's eye and attempt to turn her into the streets. The discovery of mutual intrigues is said to have been the cause of this infelicity. The young wife initiated divorce proceedings, but for the sake of the children became apparently reconciled to her husband.
A few weeks later, in the spring of 1889, Maybrick was taken ill, and after several days he died. The famous physician had treated him for dyspepsia, although it was constantly suggested to them by the patient's brother, Michael Maybrick, that poison was the cause of his illness. The discovery of more than 70 grains of arsenic in the house after the death led to an autopsy, which, however, revealed no arsenic in the stomach, or any weighable traces of the poison in any other parts of the body. But as a result of insistence by the Maybrick family, the body was exhumed three weeks later and about one-tenth of a grain of arsenic was found in the viscera. Although the smallest fatal dose of the drug on record is known to be two grains, the widow of the dead man was arrested and imprisoned.

Prolonged Trial.

Her trial was a long one, and the family physicians swore that but for the discovery of arsenic on the premises they would have given a certificate of death from natural causes. The defendant's counsel proved that for 20 years Maybrick had been a confirmed arsenic-eater, and that he daily took doses that would have killed a dozen ordinary men.
A Liverpool druggist testified that the dead man had lately been in the habit of calling several times a day at his shop to get doses of a proprietary tonic to which he had added a large proportion of arsenic. One of the family doctors gave evidence that during the year prior to Maybrick's death his wife had appealed to him to influence her husband against the habitual use of certain tonics and white powders which she believed to be doing him harm. It was the contention of the defendant's counsel that the minute quantity of arsenic found in the body was readily accounted for by Maybrick's habits as an arsenic-eater.
But a circumstance brought out by the prosecution weighed against the defendant. This was the fact that she had bought flypaper containing arsenic which she had soaked out, confessedly for use as a face bleach.
Yet if, as charged, she had previously purchased 70 grains already on hand in the house, why should she have openly manufactured more arsenic by soaking flypaper? Moreover, Mrs. Maybrick's innocence was indicated by the fact that she had been the first to give the alarm of her husband's illness, to send for his doctors, brothers and friends and to suggest that some drug was at the bottom of his illness. Before the physician's arrival she had administered to him a mustard emetic, which she would not have done had she desired the poison to take effect. Her lawyer stated that "if she had wished to put everybody in the house and the doctors themselves on the scent of poison, she could not have acted differently."

Judge's Bias Seen.

Sir Fitzjames Stephen, the presiding judge, for two days delivered to the jury a charge which in the beginning favoured the prisoner, but which toward the end showed bias against her, and as a result the jury brought in a verdict of guilty, after being out only 38 minutes. Shortly afterwards the judge wrote that out of 979 suits tried before him that of Mrs. Maybrick "was the only case in which there could be any doubt about the facts." After the trial her case threw him into a morbid state of brooding, which developed into madness, from which he never recovered. The Liverpool "Post," previously hostile to Mrs. Maybrick, now recalled the famous trial in these words:
"In fancy one still hears the distant fanfare of the trumpets as the judges with quaint pageantry pass down the hall, and still the mind's eye sees the crimson-clad figure of the great mad judge as he sat down to try his last case. A tragedy indeed was played upon the Bench no less than in the dock."
Justice Stephen sentenced Mrs. Maybrick to be hanged. After she had languished in the shadow of the scaffold for several weeks (the English law forbidding her to know when the execution was to come), she was at last warned to prepare for death. But almost at the last moment her sentence was commuted to life imprisonment.

Incarcerated 15 Years.

After she had been imprisoned for 15 years, it was discovered that Lord Russell, Chief Justice of England, had before his death written to her a letter in which he said:

"I feel as strongly as I have felt from the first that you should never have been convicted, and this opinion I have very clearly expressed to Mr. Asquith, but, I am sorry to say, hitherto without effect."

By persistent diplomatic overtures, the American Government pleaded for Mrs. Maybrick's pardon, but not until she had languished in prison for 15 years was she finally released on "ticket of leave."
The confession quoted at the head of this article was made by Maybrick to Valentine Blake, son of a British knight and member of Parliament, but did not come to light until after Mrs. Maybrick's trial.

Source: The Auckland Star, Saturday March 6, 1937, Page 4

Christchurch Liedertafel.
GEMISCHTER ABEND.

The sixth Gemischter Abend, or mixed concert, of the Christchurch Liedertafel brought together a very large audience at the Oddfellows' Hall, a large portion of which was, as is usual on such occasions, ladies. For their benefit the stage of the hall was very prettily decorated with palms and tree ferns, and these, with the bright dresses in the audience, formed a pretty scene. The first of the solos on the programme was a song by Stephen Adams, "The Quaker," in which a member of that body is entrapped by various earthly "sins and snares" apparently much to his temporal enjoyment. The humour of the song suited Mr. J.P. Newman excellently.

Source: The Star, Friday June 22, 1888

The following is an account of an Australian named Samuel L. Sharrock, who states that not only did he meet James Maybrick and have a conversation with him; but that James Maybrick confessed to him that he took arsenic, and states that Florence did not kill James.

AN AUSTRALIAN SETTLER ON THE MAYBRICK CASE.

Mr. Samuel L. Sharrock, who has recently returned from Australia, after a score of years' residence there, has, through the medium of the "Daily Chronicle," been throwing fresh light upon the Maybrick case. Mr. Sharrock lived at Aigburth, in the same district of Liverpool as the Maybrick family.
James Maybrick, for whose murder by arsenic poisoning his wife still languishes within prison walls, was, says Mr. Sharrock, "introduced to me as the brother of 'Stephen Adams,' the composer, and being a bit of a musician myself, I was interested in him. After we had had a dance or two, he would say, "Come out and have a smoke." Several times I noticed that he looked particularly queer, and that there was a strange odour about him. When I asked him what was the matter, he said that he was in indifferent health, and that his peculiar looks were due to drugs which he had taken.
"What do you take?" I asked him. "I take all kinds of things," he said; "I am one of those maniacs who are always trying all kinds of medicine." "What do you take mostly" I asked him one night. He replied, "I take arsenic, for one thing."
After that I met Maybrick at balls at the Town Hall, Liverpool, and on the flags of the Exchange. "Well, Maybrick," I said to him once, "how are you this morning? Are you going on with that stuff of yours?" "Yes," he said, "I can't give it up."
Mrs. Maybrick was a particularly beautiful woman, the belle of Aigburth. She suffered, however, from blotches on the skin, and I believe she was advised by some one to try arsenic wash. I could go blindfold to the shop where she purchased the fly-papers, which she soaked in water, washing herself in the liquid. My honest belief is that, knowing her husband's habits, she was afraid of it being known that she used arsenic, and that was why she adopted this course; but she had no more to do with poisoning her husband than you had."
Mr. Sharrock's explanation for not making the statement sooner was that when he received papers containing the report of the trial he was in Australia and had the worries of his own business to look after. If he felt sure that an innocent woman had been unjustly convicted of murder, he might at least have spared the time from his "own worries" to write a letter stating what he knew on the subject.

Source: The Auckland Star, Tuesday June 19, 1900, Page 2

Here is a much longer version of Mr. Sharrock's account:

THE MAYBRICK CASE.
STRANGE STORY BY AN AUSTRALIAN FRIEND OF THE HUSBAND.

SLAVE TO THE DRUG HABIT.

It was on August 7, 1889, after a trial which extended over six days, before Mr. Justice Stephen, at Liverpool, that Mrs. Florence Elizabeth Maybrick was sentenced to death for the wilful murder of her husband, James Maybrick, a cotton broker, well known in that city.
A fortnight later it was announced that the sentence had been commuted into one of penal servitude for life, and since that date, although may strenuous appeals have been made to successive Home Secretaries, the unfortunate woman, in whose fate both England and America were concerned, has been within prison walls, with little prospect of release.
The contention of the prosecution was that James Maybrick died from the administration of arsenic. That drug, said Mr. Justice Stephen, in summing up, was found present in the organs of the deceased. The question was, How did it get there? The jury, by their verdict, said that it had been administered by the wife. It could not be denied that Mrs. Maybrick had been in the possession of certain fly papers from which arsenic could be extracted. But even the evidence given at the trial went to show that Mr. Maybrick was in the habit of taking various medicines in which potent drugs were more or less present, and the argument of those who believed in the innocence of the wife was that to these his death was attributable.
Yesterday (writes a "Daily Chronicle" representative) I had an interview with a gentleman who, had he been in England at the time of the trial, might have given evidence of a valuable character concerning the habits of Mr. Maybrick, even before his marriage, which took place in 1881. Twenty-four or 25 years ago Mr. Samuel L. Sharrock, recently returned from Australia, was a resident in Aigburth, the district of Liverpool in which the Maybrick family had its abode. This is the curious story he told:
"After attending school in Edinburgh I went to Liverpool, and served my time in an engineering works at Garston, where my father was manager. We lived in Aigburth, where Mr. Maybrick also resided, and, although his family moved in slightly higher circles than ours, we frequently met. I had many friends in the neighbourhood, and we, with the lady who is now my wife, were in the habit of attending the charming dances which were given by Mr. Peter Longton, at Crompton Hall, near Prescot. It was here that I met Mr. Maybrick. He was introduced to me as a brother of "Stephen Adams," the composer, and, being a bit of a musician myself, I was interested in him. After we had had a dance or two he would say, "Come out and have a smoke." Several times I noticed that he looked particularly queer, and that there was a strange odour about him. When I asked him what was the matter, he said that he was in indifferent health, and that his peculiar looks were due to drugs that he had taken.

MAYBRICK'S MANIA FOR DRUGS.

"What do you take?" I asked him. "I take all kinds of things," he said; "I am one of those maniacs who are always trying all kinds of medicine." "What do you take mostly?" I asked him one night. He replied, "I take arsenic, for one thing."
"After that I met Maybrick at balls at the Town Hall, Liverpool, and on the flags of the Exchange.
"Well, Maybrick," I said to him once, "how are you this morning? Are you going on with that stuff of yours?" "Yes," he said, 'I can't give it up.'
"To my own personal knowledge Mrs. Maybrick was a particularly beautiful woman, the belle of Aigburth. She suffered, however, from blotches on the skin, and I believe she was advised by someone to try an arsenic wash. I could go blindfold to the shop where she purchased the fly papers, which she soaked in water, washing herself in the liquid. My honest belief is that, knowing her husband's habits, she was afraid of it being known that she used arsenic, and that was why she adopted this course; but she had no more to do with poisoning her husband than you had."
"I left Liverpool in 1878, and after working at Chester and in London I went to Australia, where I received papers containing the report of the trial sent out by friends who knew that I was acquainted with the family. But I was 12,000 miles away, and had the worries of my own business to look after. It was only the other evening, when talking with some friends about curious criminal cases, that I felt I ought, in justice to the poor little woman, to state publicly what I know. What I have said I am prepared to swear to anywhere, and if I can be of any use I shall only be too pleased. If Maybrick told me once, he told me twenty times that he was an inveterate taker of drugs, and could not cure himself."
Such is the story which Mr. Sharrock tells. Its weak point is that it deals with a period anterior to Mr. Maybrick's marriage; but it is conceivable that a man who made a habit of taking arsenic and other drugs might continue the practice with ultimately fatal results. - "Daily Chronicle."

Source: The Examiner, Saturday 23 June 1900, Page 13

I have found a few likely candidates for the individual named Samuel L. Sharrock:

SHARROCK, Samuel Head Married M 51 1830 Civil Engineer
Bolton, Lancashire

SHARROCK, Elizabeth Wife Married F 57 1824
Kirkwall Orkney

SHARROCK, Mary Grace Daughter Single F 24 1857
Marylebone, Middlesex

SHARROCK, Alice Edith Daughter Single F 19 1862 Scholar
S Lambeth, Surrey

SHARROCK, Elizabeth Ellen Daughter Single F 16 1865 Scholar
Manchester, Lancashire

SHARROCK, Herbt Norman Son Single M 14 1867 Scholar
Manchester, Lancashire

ROBERTS, Matilda Servant Single F 24 1857 Domestic Servant
London Colney, Hertfordshire

Piece: 1373
Folio: 52
Page: 15
Registration District: Barnet
Civil Parish: Fryern Barnet
Municipal Borough:
Address: Oakleigh Park, Fryern Barnet
County: Middlesex

or............

SHARROCK, Samuel Head Married M 36 1845 Engine Driver In Cotton Mill
Preston, Lancashire

SHARROCK, Margaret Wife Married F 31 1850
Bolton, Lancashire

SHARROCK, Ann Daughter Single F 8 1873 Scholar
Bolton, Lancashire

SHARROCK, Thomas Son Single M 6 1875 Scholar
Bolton, Lancashire

SHARROCK, Mary Jane Daughter Single F 5 1876 Scholar
Bolton, Lancashire

SHARROCK, James S Son Single M 3 1878
Bolton, Lancashire

SHARROCK, Samuel Son Single M 2 1879
Bolton, Lancashire

Piece: 3841
Folio: 78
Page: 37
Registration District: Bolton
Civil Parish: Great Bolton
Municipal Borough:
Address: 17, Burns St, Great Bolton
County: Lancashire